Page 12 of 14 FirstFirst ... 2567891011121314 LastLast
Results 144 to 156 of 178
  1. #144
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    11
    I see not much has changed since my last post. The “liberals” are still acting like conservatives and the “conservatives” are still acting like liberals LMAO.

    I take exception to all the name calling and the like. Once again I say to you this is not making a difference. All those reading just ignore the good as well as the bad as long as it is wrapped in bigotry, slander, and out and out disrespect for the others posting here.

    The one post that truly holds the most truth has been nearly totally ignored. Our problems run much deeper than the piddley little arguments going on here. We have a problem with efficiency. As energy was always cheap and easy to get we as a world and a society have taken the easy way out. Instead of working to improve existing systems, we have just continued to waste what we have had.

    I grasp the idea that very few could/can afford to “change” the way they live AND maintain a standard of living where they could “keep up with the Jones’” But soon there will be no choice. Blame who or what you will but in the end every one of us is to blame.

    We waste our money on things we do not need. We waste our words on those who either do not know any better or do not care about anything but themselves. Faith covers all that we cannot explain.

    Technically the only jobs, therefore the only unemployment, the government can tracks are those it has control over. As unemployment insurance is a government run entity it has no way of tracking the millions of people, like me, that have never been on its roles. In my 50+ years of life I have never collected a single dime from the government. If I choose to be “without a job” it is my business and they have no way of tracking that.

    Studies are great for “creating” jobs out of thin air. They keep a segment of our population employed and looking useful. But they are still flawed in very basic ways. As someone quoted, it is impossible to know if the results of the study are a reflection of what would have happened if the government stood by and watched or a result of the billions of dollars created from thin air and passed out to a select few in our country.

    As anyone who has “gotten into trouble” with credit knows, if you continue to borrow against tomorrow sooner or later time runs out and there is no tomorrow to borrow against. The jobs that were saved/created by borrowing from next week, month, or year, will soon cease to exist. It is impossible for them not to. Our government……. This means all of it as neither of the two main parties is any different than the other, Is hoping that sometime next week, month, or year, something will magically happen to create jobs out of thin air and replace the “fake” ones they have created in order to remain in power and to keep the money and goods they have already stolen from the rest of us.

    History tells us it will not work. History also tells us that at some point the borrowed money and time has to be paid back. It is then that we will all truly suffer.

  2. #145
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    I'm an old cowhand from the Rio Grande
    Posts
    17,089
    Quote Originally Posted by cool-in-cayman View Post
    Tootsie, the report basically describes itself as questionable. If you read it and cannot understand it, well dear I can't help you.
    Perhaps this portion of the report can help put those who no longer care to click on your links in a better position to understand the report:

    Although CBO has examined data on output and
    employment during the period since ARRA’s enactment,
    those data are not as helpful in determining ARRA’s economic
    effects as might be supposed because isolating the
    effects would require knowing what path the economy
    would have taken in the absence of the law. Because that
    path cannot be observed, the new data add only limited
    information about ARRA’s impact.
    Which accounts for the range of estimates in the CBO's figures.

    See son, this is standard in economic reports. Concrete numbers are virtually impossible, so ranges are used. To inform the reader, all variables and situations that would effect the results are noted. This does not mean that the report is invalid.


    I'm sorry if you expected firm numbers and incontrovertible proof, but then folks inexperienced in these types of reports often, like yourself, have little understanding of the statistical methodologies, defintions and procedures employed.

    Thus being poorly equipped to analyze anything more economically complex than purchasing a bottle of ketchup, you resort to an ideological approach.







    Hell the numbers you posted have wild ranges.
    See above.


    Toots, the report cannot determine how many jobs would have existed without the stimulus money, and therefore the report cannot prove how many jobs were saved or created. You were responding to Robo's post where he said there is no proof of how many jobs were saved or created. You cited the CBO's report in your rebuttal, I guess as proof. It falls far short of proof to anyone who is not a complete moonbat.
    See above.



    It is interesting that you would consider the stimulus a success given the current unemployment rate and dreadful economy. Maybe obama can hire everyone who is unemployed. I'm sure you would consider that also a success.
    I consider it a measure that kept the Bush economnic crisis from developing into a full economic meltdown.





    Rabid ideologue, geez toots, talk about the kettle calling the pot.
    You operate on ideology, I operate on reality.


    What did you think of the surge in Iraq..? Failure right?
    As a tactical situation, probably a success. As a strategic component of the overall Iraq policy, the jury is still out on that.

    Of course, had the leadership from the Bush Whitehouse been less inept and bumbling, the surge would not have been necessary.


    Wrong about the stimulus, wrong about the surge. Funny how results don't matter with you moonbats.
    What is a moonbat?
    Gods are fragile things; they may be killed by a whiff of science or a dose of common sense.

    Chapman Cohen

  3. #146
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    11
    Geerair.
    I take it from your posts that you are an armchair economist? You have been trained in the school of hard knocks and have actually put your beliefs to the test in the real world in your own life?
    If so I would really appreciate you enlightening me on how well it works and how I can join you in this great endeavor. It would seem that with all the answers you have you should also be able to help all those who need financial assistance. At which point the issues of our country would be solved and we would not need any more of your derogatory remarks to tide us over until our society catches up with your understanding and wisdom.

    Mean time… at this point I do truly believe it is time to end the attacks on the past. None of us can change what has already happened and… I was taught that using the past as an excuse to continue to do the same thing means you agree with what happened in the past.

    So by your own words Obama is doing nothing different than Bush did for the years he was in office. Therefore it is no surprise to me that things haven’t changed.

    Last I heard the definition of insanity is doing the same thing repeatedly expecting a different result.

    And yes you can have the last word. LOL. From here I will not address your posts unless they contain original thoughts that can be attributed only to you AND have something worthwhile to say that will increase the understanding and work towards a “cure” for what you are complaining about.

  4. #147
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    11
    Sorry for the double do not know what happened.

  5. #148
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Eastern PA
    Posts
    68,962
    Quote Originally Posted by printer2 View Post
    Lying usually implies deceiving people. Being wrong is not lying. That said he is not that good at getting things right. Could go after him for that but lying, I do not think so.
    I refer to Obama as lying because he did not put the money he was given only to programs that would have created the most jobs. He spent the money bolstering labor unions and other large business machines that are pumping part of that money right back into the Democratic coffers to use for getting Democrats elected to Congress in November and to get him re-elected in 2012.

    So, I am sticking with Obama lied to us because he did not do with the money what he claimed he was going to do with the money.
    Government is a disease...
    ...masquerading as its own cure…
    Ecclesiastes 10:2 NIV


  6. #149
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Eastern PA
    Posts
    68,962
    Quote Originally Posted by geerair View Post
    Chronologically yes, mentally you are elderly.
    I can't think of one person who knows me that would agree with you on this.
    Government is a disease...
    ...masquerading as its own cure…
    Ecclesiastes 10:2 NIV


  7. #150
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Eastern PA
    Posts
    68,962
    Quote Originally Posted by 1stbscout View Post
    Geerair.
    I take it from your posts that you are an armchair economist? You have been trained in the school of hard knocks and have actually put your beliefs to the test in the real world in your own life?
    If so I would really appreciate you enlightening me on how well it works and how I can join you in this great endeavor. It would seem that with all the answers you have you should also be able to help all those who need financial assistance. At which point the issues of our country would be solved and we would not need any more of your derogatory remarks to tide us over until our society catches up with your understanding and wisdom.

    Mean time… at this point I do truly believe it is time to end the attacks on the past. None of us can change what has already happened and… I was taught that using the past as an excuse to continue to do the same thing means you agree with what happened in the past.

    So by your own words Obama is doing nothing different than Bush did for the years he was in office. Therefore it is no surprise to me that things haven’t changed.

    Last I heard the definition of insanity is doing the same thing repeatedly expecting a different result.

    And yes you can have the last word. LOL. From here I will not address your posts unless they contain original thoughts that can be attributed only to you AND have something worthwhile to say that will increase the understanding and work towards a “cure” for what you are complaining about.
    Good luck getting anything sensible out of geer. She has made it quite clear that she is only here for her own enjoyment. Antagonizing folks with useless rhetoric seems to be what amuses her the most.
    Government is a disease...
    ...masquerading as its own cure…
    Ecclesiastes 10:2 NIV


  8. #151
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    985
    Originally Posted by cool-in-cayman
    Tootsie, the report basically describes itself as questionable. If you read it and cannot understand it, well dear I can't help you.
    Perhaps this portion of the report can help put those who no longer care to click on your links in a better position to understand the report:

    Although CBO has examined data on output and
    employment during the period since ARRA’s enactment,
    those data are not as helpful in determining ARRA’s economic
    effects as might be supposed because isolating the
    effects would require knowing what path the economy
    would have taken in the absence of the law. Because that
    path cannot be observed, the new data add only limited
    information about ARRA’s impact.

    geerair wrote:Which accounts for the range of estimates in the CBO's figures.
    You refuted Robo's post with this report as proof. It is not proof. It is an estimate with ranges of results that differ by more than 200% from high to low.

    geerair wrote: See son, this is standard in economic reports. Concrete numbers are virtually impossible, so ranges are used. To inform the reader, all variables and situations that would effect the results are noted. This does not mean that the report is invalid.
    Spin and more spin. These numbers are far from concrete and as a source of proof of how many jobs were created or saved, they are without a doubt invalid.


    geerair wrote: I'm sorry if you expected firm numbers and incontrovertible proof, but then folks inexperienced in these types of reports often, like yourself, have little understanding of the statistical methodologies, defintions and procedures employed.
    Ding bat, if the government hires people at the same rate that the private sector lays people off you do not get any net gain in jobs. In fact the government jobs should not be considered as real economy generated jobs.
    The report basically stipulates that the jobs cannot be accurately counted. For the sake of this argument the report is useless much like your ongoing drivel.

    geerair wrote: Thus being poorly equipped to analyze anything more economically complex than purchasing a bottle of ketchup, you resort to an ideological approach.
    And you result to intellectual dishonesty because the facts rarely support your asinine arguments.


    Quote:
    It is interesting that you would consider the stimulus a success given the current unemployment rate and dreadful economy. Maybe obama can hire everyone who is unemployed. I'm sure you would consider that also a success.

    geerair wrote: I consider it a measure that kept the Bush economnic crisis from developing into a full economic meltdown.
    Your liberal bretheren have been essentially running things for 4 years now. If Bush did anything wrong it was his inability to effectively stop liberals from ruining the housing market with their social engineering of the residential banking and lending system. Basically forcing banks to lend to people who had no business buying homes and in so doing creating massive loopholes to be exploited by unscrupulus mortgage brokers.


    Quote:
    What did you think of the surge in Iraq..? Failure right?

    geerair wrote: As a tactical situation, probably a success. As a strategic component of the overall Iraq policy, the jury is still out on that.
    "Probably a success"...seriously? It was a success by all measure and you know it. Even your dear leader now admits it.
    The surge has done its job, the jury is not out for anyone with half a brain..

    geerair wrote: You operate on ideology, I operate on reality.
    Oh really? Your ideology prevents you from fully admitting that the surge was a success, yet in spite of all signs to the contrary you consider the stimulus a success. Your delusions are quite stunning.

    Quote:
    Wrong about the stimulus, wrong about the surge. Funny how results don't matter with you moonbats.

    geerair wrote:What is a moonbat?
    Toots, you've been demoted from moonbat to ding bat..google it.

  9. #152
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    I'm an old cowhand from the Rio Grande
    Posts
    17,089
    To sum up:


    We can identify two factors that drive CinC's hysterical grumblings:


    1. A mind barren of knowledge and understanding of statistics science.

    Of course to CinC, anything beyond counting on fingers and toes is a dark mystery.


    2. An ideological zealotry that would embarrass even Pat Buchanan.


    Of course if the CBO study had endorsed CinC's views, he would sing the prasies of the CBO as the most accurate and objective economic analysis unit in the civilized world.
    Gods are fragile things; they may be killed by a whiff of science or a dose of common sense.

    Chapman Cohen

  10. #153
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    I'm an old cowhand from the Rio Grande
    Posts
    17,089
    Quote Originally Posted by RoBoTeq View Post
    I can't think of one person who knows me that would agree with you on this.
    That would be consistent with a personality disorder.
    Gods are fragile things; they may be killed by a whiff of science or a dose of common sense.

    Chapman Cohen

  11. #154
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    985
    Quote Originally Posted by geerair View Post
    Of course if the CBO study had endorsed CinC's views, he would sing the prasies of the CBO as the most accurate and objective economic analysis unit in the civilized world.
    Actually the CBO does endorse my views in many ways. It clearly states in a few different ways that the numbers cited are very rough estimates at best, cannot be relied on as being accurate and even though the estimates range wildely from high to low even the ranges cannot be trusted. Just read a couple paragraphs before the figures and after the figures.

    Must be your lack of reading comprehension acting up again toots.

  12. #155
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    I'm an old cowhand from the Rio Grande
    Posts
    17,089
    Quote Originally Posted by cool-in-cayman View Post
    Actually the CBO does endorse my views in many ways. It clearly states in a few different ways that the numbers cited are very rough estimates at best, cannot be relied on as being accurate and even though the estimates range wildely from high to low even the ranges cannot be trusted. Just read a couple paragraphs before the figures and after the figures.

    Must be your lack of reading comprehension acting up again toots.
    I am reconciled to the fact that I must spend my time explaining to you what a reasonably intelligent person would have already discovered.

    That you continue to misinterpret the report can only be explained by a severe lack of reading comprehension, a lack of knowledge of statistical prodcedures and an ideological confirmation bias that only allows you to see what you want to see.

    I will spell it out as plainly as I can.

    The purpose of the report was to elicit CBO comments on ARRA's recipient's reports.

    The CBO also provided their estimates of the results of ARRA.

    The parts you posted and rely on to support your erroroneous view are the CBO comments concerning the weaknesses and shortcomings of THE RECIPIENT'S REPORTS.

    Which is why the CBO didn't use recipient reports preferring to use historical data and mathematical models instead.

    This was very clearly explained in the paragraph immediately preceding the CBO estimates.

    I quote: "Estimating the laws overall effects on employment REQUIRES A MORE COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS THAN CAN BE ACHIEVED BY USING THE RECIPIENT'S REPORTS."

    The paragraph goes on to explain that the CBO used different methods of determining their estimates.

    Following these estimates is the part you posted which WERE REFERRING TO THE RECIPIENT'S REPORTS AND NOT THE METHODOLOGY THE CBO USED.

    The report then goes on to explain the methodologies they used (historical data and mathematical models) instead of the recipient's reports.




    Again, the part you quoted and on which you base silly views refers to the RECIPIENT'S REPORT and not to the methdology used by the CBO.


    I realize you suffer from ideological zealotry, but really, you should carefully read and ponder before embarrassing yourself in public with such pathetically inept posts.







    (
    Gods are fragile things; they may be killed by a whiff of science or a dose of common sense.

    Chapman Cohen

  13. #156
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Eastern PA
    Posts
    68,962
    Quote Originally Posted by geerair View Post
    I am reconciled to the fact that I must spend my time explaining to you what a resonably intelligent person would have already discovered.

    That you continue to misinterpret the report can only be explained by a severe lack of reading comprehension, a lack of knowledge of statistical prodcedures and an ideological confirmation bias that only allows you to see what you want to see.

    I will spell it out as plainly as I can.

    The purpose of the report was to elicit CBO comments on ARRA's recipient's reports.

    The CBO also provided their estimates of the results of ARRA.

    The parts you posted and rely on to support your erroroneous view are the CBO comments concerning the weaknesses and shortcomings of THE RECIPIENT'S REPORTS.

    Which is why the CBO didn't use recipient reports preferring to use historical data and mathematical models instead.

    This was very clealy explained in the paragraph immediately preceding the CBO estimates.

    I quote: "Estimating the laws overall effects on employment REQUIRES A MORE COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS THAN CAN BE ACHIEVED BY USING THE RECIPIENT'S REPORTS."

    The paragraph goes on to explain that the CBO used different methods of determining their estimates.

    Following these estimates is the part you posted which WERE REFERRING TO THE RECIPIENT'S REPORTS AND NOT THE METHODOLOGY THE CBO USED.

    The report then goes on to explain the methodologies they used (historical data and mathematical models) instead of the recipient's reports.




    Again, the part you quoted and on which you base silly views refers to the RECIPIENT'S REPORT and not to the methdology used by the CBO.


    I realize you suffer from ideological zealotry, but really, you should carefully read and ponder before embarrassing yourself in public with such pathetically inept posts.







    (
    Still more Americans not working. Unemployment still higher then when Obama took office and after Obama was given hundreds of billions of dollars to reduce unemployment.
    Government is a disease...
    ...masquerading as its own cure…
    Ecclesiastes 10:2 NIV


Page 12 of 14 FirstFirst ... 2567891011121314 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Comfortech Show Promo Image

Related Forums

Plumbing Talks | Contractor Magazine
Forums | Electrical Construction & Maintenance (EC&M) Magazine
Comfortech365 Virtual Event